Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Poole v. State

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided January 7, 1983No. [Nos. 9 and 11, September Term, 1982.]Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partDavidson, J.

I agree with the majority that the convictions of the appellant, Timothy Clyde Poole (accused), for the felony murder of his co-felon, Steven Scott Horad, and the use of a handgun in a crime of violence must be reversed. I therefore join in the views expressed in that portion of part 1 of the opinion that reach that conclusion. I further agree with the majority that the death penalty imposed for the accused’s conviction for the premeditated murder of David C. MacLarty must be vacated both because of the jury’s improper consideration of the accused’s conviction for the felony murder of Horad…

2Cases cited43 opinions

  1. Frye v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1923
  2. People v. CarterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1957
  3. People v. BaynesIllinois Supreme Court · 1981
  4. Commonwealth v. a JuvenileMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1974
  5. State v. DriverSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1962

38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API